9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , confirming the order of ITO (TDS) u/s 206C (6A) of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable and bad in law since the instant assessee is not a "person" for the purpose of section 206C(6C) of the Income Tax Act and hence the instant proceedings are patently illegal and bad in law. 2. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), confirming the order of ITO (TDS) u/s 206C (6A) of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable and bad in law since the assessment order is itself barred by limitation. 3. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), sustaining the order of ITO (TDS) u/s 206C (6A) of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable and bad in law since the authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, the Ld.CIT(A) is not justified in refusing to adjudicate Upon the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee concerning the instant controversy citing the reason that provisions of Rule 46A were attracted and the same were not satisfied. The provisions of Rule' 46A are extraneous to the instant controversy and the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in invoking the said provision. 9. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is unsustainable being non speaking and highly cryptic. 10. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A) has passed the order without providing the assessee with a due and proper opportunity of hearing and therefore the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2018 and the Lucknow Bench order of the Tribunal in the case of The District Magistrate District Mining Officer vs. ITO(TDS) in ITA Nos. 243 to 246/Lkw/2019 dated 16.12.2020. Referring to these orders the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the Tribunal held that for passing order u/s 206C(6)/206C(7) the reasonable period of limitation is four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submits that there is no limitation prescribed in the provisions of Section 206C of the Act for passing the order. The Ld. DR referring to the provisions of Section 201(1) of the Act submits that a period of seven years was prescribed as limitation for passing the order, which may be applied to the provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mendment is not retrospective. Accordingly, the liability of tax collected at source is also a vicarious liability of the assessee to assist the department in the measure to avoid any possibility of tax avoidance by the persons with whom the specific transactions have been entered into by the assessee. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the analogy and reasoning given in the decisions of various Hon'ble High Courts cited supra in respect of the limitation for passing the order U/s 201 of the Act, is also applicable for considering the reasonable time period for passing the order U/s 206C of the Act. The provisions of Section 201 and 206C of the Act are having same scheme and object being the measures against the avoidance of tax by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
